Account suspended: What is Twitter’s policy on ‘impersonations’?

What has Musk said about impersonations? And why the sudden crackdown?

“Going forward, any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying “parody” will be permanently suspended”, the billionaire tweeted on November 7. He added that since the company plans to roll out “widespread verification, there will be no warning,” before a suspension.

Further, this no impersonation rule will be a condition when someone signs up for a Twitter Blue subscription — where Musk plans to charge users $8 per month for verification and other features. He also replied that while a verified user can “use a pseudonym,” they cannot “engage in malicious deception.”

One consequence of Musk’s Twitter takeover has been that many users have decided to change their user name and profile picture to that of ‘Elon Musk’. While some are mocking him, others have responded to tweets pretending to be him, given they changed their user name and even profile picture to the one that Musk is using.

Among the more well-known suspensions have been American comedian Kathy Griffin and Ian Woolford, a professor of Hindi at Australia’s La Trobe University.

So what exactly is Twitter’s policy on impersonation and has it really changed?

Musk’s tweets sparked a debate on whether Twitter had changed its policies around impersonations, given the assumption that these were never banned on the platform.

According to the policy documents, users cannot “ impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations to mislead, confuse, or deceive others, nor use a fake identity in a manner that disrupts the experience of others…”

What this means is that one cannot change their Twitter user name to that of a notable personality or even brand with the intention of deceiving users on the platform. This is not the same as the account handle, which cannot be changed once you have picked it.

But what about parody? Say one wishes to create an account that is a parody of a character on a show. Or a parody of a politician. Twitter states that for “parody, commentary, or fan account,” it needs to be clearly mentioned in the user profile that the account plans to “discuss, satirise, or share information about that entity.”

Further, Twitter wants this distinction to be made clear in both “the account name and bio”. It also wants parody accounts to use “language…that can be understood by the intended audience”. Those who try to “hide or obscure the required profile language through the use of excessively long account names or specialized fonts and characters,” are in violation of the policy.

So if you create an account mocking a character from Game of Thrones, you need to make that clear in the profile username and bio description. A parody account will need a disclaimer stating that it is not affiliated with the person, brand or organisation. The user could include the term ‘parody’ in the handle name, their user name and bio description.

In fact, many parody accounts already do this. They typically include a line saying they are in no way affiliated with the actual person, brand, or organisation and that the account is a parody or satire. Some parody accounts include the terms “parody”, “satire”, and “fan” in their user handles as well to make the distinction clearer.

What typically happens when someone violates the impersonation policy?

Those who violate the policy could be asked to modify their profile. The page adds that in some cases they might even be handed a temporary suspension, even before a warning requesting such edits.

If one makes the required changes, the account is typically given back. But if you don’t follow through, then a permanent suspension is handed out. This typically happens when a user makes “insufficient edits” to the profile after their first warning.

So what has changes now? And how will this policy operate under Twitter Blue, given that it will verify anyone willing to pay?

The suspensions for violating the policy have sparked debate on the platform and how Twitter was implementing the same, with some saying Musk was changing things, especially regarding verified accounts using parody and getting suspended.

This prompted Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety, to issue a long thread reminding users that impersonation was always banned and that the platform has banned “more than half a million accounts” for similar violations.

Roth also said that parody still remains protected on the platform as long as the accounts follow the guidelines. He added that “when Verified accounts use impersonation as a tactic — whether for parody or not — it creates an especially confusing experience. It’s been our long-standing practice to suspend Verified users when they do this.”

Of course, there are also questions on how Twitter Blue will impact verification given Musk wants to make it available to everyone for a price.

Roth conceded it will “raise the stakes for this kind of impersonation.” He posted that the company will increase its “proactive review of Blue Verified accounts that show signs of impersonating another user,” though this is a short-term measure. It will suspend accounts that it finds are impersonating others and using Twitter blue.

He also explained that the one reason they did not launch the verification for Twitter Blue was the US 2022 midterm elections, given the risks of users impersonating public officials.

“Long-term, I think we need to invest more in identity verification as a complement to proof-of-humanness. Paid Verification is a strong (not perfect) signal of humanness, which helps fight bots and spam. But that’s not the same thing as identity verification,” he said.

Roth added that the process of verification is tricky because Twitter has to look at confirming the authenticity of the said person and notability as well. But Musk is getting rid of the ‘notable’ aspect, and Roth said he supported this.

According to him, Twitter Blue being a paid feature will help ensure proof that the account is being run by a human and that for spammers, $8 per account will raise the cost a lot making it difficult to run multiple bots at scale.